Results 1 to 25 of 25

Thread: The law isn't even introduced and the pofiteering begins

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    North Central Wisconsin, ,
    Posts
    768

    The law isn't even introduced and the pofiteering begins

    I got this email the other day from a firearms instructor. As someone who has and is currently enrolled in firearms training classes, this kind of profiteering makes me angry. Straight from the horses mouth, Conceal Carry instructors promise that government mandated training will line their pocket books as "artificial" demand brought about by the law will drive the mandatory training class prices sky high.

    I’m betting Wisconsinites elect a governor in November that will sign a permit-to-carry bill by February. Clients are already asking if we’ve started a waiting list for training.

    Be assured that my partner and I have been quite busy preparing for that blitz and anticipate a jammed training calendar the next couple of years.

    When Minnesota finally passed its shall-issue carry bill a few years ago, with an abundance of part-timers jumping into the permit training arena, as you might guess, quality of instruction varied widely. Even so, waiting lists for training stretched to a few months and tuition soared to $300 or more in the larger metropolitan areas!!

    You should expect similar circumstances in Wisconsin in that until late-2012 and possibly later, our Training Calendar will be jammed with Wisconsin Permit-to-Carry Certification courses and nearly barren of Utah permit and other Handgun and Carbine Academy programs. ......

    .....With advance reservation, you’ll be placed on our waiting list on a first-come, first-served basis, meaning the first enrollee will have first choice of available training dates; the second enrollee will have the second choice; and so on, until each Wisconsin permit class roster is filled.....

    .....To reserve your place on the Wisconsin waiting list, simply call to make your reservation and non-refundable deposit of $100 for each reservation. With your reservations, you’ll have our pledges that your tuition won’t exceed $199 and that if the tuition rate for our Wisconsin course is less than $199 on the date of the course you reserve, you will enjoy that lower rate.
    There is more to this email, but I think you get the drift of it. Considering anyone who wants firearm training is free to go out and obtain it today of their own free will, (like I am), clearly a mandatory training requirement in a new law is as much about profit for firearms instructors as it is about perpetuating a myth that the mandatory class is going to increase safety.

    Avoid the government bureaucracy along with the profiteering by instructors. Contact your legislators after the fall election and let them know you DO NOT support mandatory training.

    I do not begrudge anyone for trying to make a living by offering such services to clients. What bothers me is if training instructors promote legislation that requires training/certification in order to line their pockets. Beware!

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Madison, Wisconsin, ,
    Posts
    214
    Quote Originally Posted by phred View Post
    I do not begrudge anyone for trying to make a living by offering such services to clients. What bothers me is if training instructors promote legislation that requires training/certification in order to line their pockets. Beware!
    Yeah, nothing like stacking the odds against Constitutional carry by promoting absorbent fees and training/cert classes from the get go.

  3. #3
    Regular Member johnny amish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    High altitude of Vernon County, ,
    Posts
    1,025
    Permission=profit. You've gotta love the influence of the NRA over the years.

  4. #4
    Regular Member Yooper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Houghton County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    808
    There's no reason someone here can't become an instructor and only charge for the course the actual cost of running the course. I was fortunate to find an instructor here that charged $50. Of course, a no permit system would be better.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Somewhere, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,029
    They just don't get it do they. They continue to use Minnesota as an example. There is no comparison They had a captive audience so to speak in Minnesota. If you don't have a permit you don't carry period. The instructors can charge what ever price they want. If you want to carry in Minnesota, open or concealed, you pay the price. Why? Minnesota is one of six states that does not have a right to keep and bear arms amendment in their state constitutions. The carry of firearms for personal protection in Minnesota is a state issued privlege. Wisconsin is different. It has one of the best right to bear arms state constitutional amendments in the nation. Wisconsinites aren't apt to flock to CC instuction in droves unless the costs are are low and voluntary. The right to open carry will be the equalizer. Besides I believe that the concealed carry prohibition statute 941.23 will eventually be found unconstitutional. At least two justices on the WSC have already stated such and the membership on the WSC has changed to be less liberal than at the time Cole, Hamdan and Fischer were decided.

    The state right to keep and bear arms amendment makes no specific mention of manner of carry therefore it can be presumed to apply to all manners of carry. In Cole the WSC made a lot of noise about legislative intent. Saying that a number of drafts, memoes and personal comments strongly suggest that the legislative intent was to leave the existing concealed carry prohibition statute stay in place. A review of some of the drafts and memoes show some intention of that but that information is construction information. The only version that is of any value is the final version and because it makes no mention of an exclusion of concealed carry it is my belief the final legislative intent is that the right to keep and bear arms includes all manners of carry. That being the case there can be no mandatory requirement for training, anymore than requiring training to go to church. There may be some training requirements for recirocity but it can't be mandated for intrastate carry. IANL but that is how I see it.

  6. #6
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961

    P2I2 is not a friend of Constitutional Carry.

    Quote Originally Posted by trailblazer2003 View Post
    Yeah, nothing like stacking the odds against Constitutional carry by promoting absorbent fees and training/cert classes from the get go.
    That would be the P2I2 at work. First the requirement, then there will be special priveledges for permittees.

    (P2I2 = Perks for Permittee Instruction Industry)
    He wore his gun outside his pants for all the honest world to see. Pancho & Lefty

    The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us....There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! ...The war is inevitable–and let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come …………. PATRICK HENRY speech 1776

  7. #7
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by phred View Post
    SNIP I do not begrudge anyone for trying to make a living by offering such services to clients. What bothers me is if training instructors promote legislation that requires training/certification in order to line their pockets. Beware!
    I think the word "profiteering" is a bit of an exaggeration, until the instructor lobby connection is shown, or suspicious circumstances are shown to make an instructor lobby causation probable.

    Otherwise, it is just as the OPer says--people making a living by offering services to clients.

    Maybe you fellas in Wisconsin already have plenty of evidence of instructor lobby meddling. If so, please include that info for unfamiliar readers. Otherwise, to an unfamiliar reader, the word "profiteering" is hanging out there as unsupported. And, thus an exaggeration of everyday providing client services.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    Maybe you fellas in Wisconsin already have plenty of evidence of instructor lobby meddling. If so, please include that info for unfamiliar readers.
    MN resident and instructor does demonstration of training course for WI legislature in 2005.

    MN resident and instructor starts OC county resolution(s).

    MN resident and instructor starts "pro gun rights org." In order to be a member, you MUST be a certified instructor, certified by HIM.

    MN instructor comes tells everybody, "don't carry you will be taken down." Same erroneous statement controlling LEO make. Then comes on WI OCDO and begs for money.

    Yea, I'd say that the WI people have had just about enough of the WI should be more like MN crowd.

  9. #9
    Founder's Club Member springfield 1911's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Racine, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    484
    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Nemo View Post
    They just don't get it do they. They continue to use Minnesota as an example. There is no comparison They had a captive audience so to speak in Minnesota. If you don't have a permit you don't carry period. The instructors can charge what ever price they want. If you want to carry in Minnesota, open or concealed, you pay the price. Why? Minnesota is one of six states that does not have a right to keep and bear arms amendment in their state constitutions. The carry of firearms for personal protection in Minnesota is a state issued privlege. Wisconsin is different. It has one of the best right to bear arms state constitutional amendments in the nation. Wisconsinites aren't apt to flock to CC instuction in droves unless the costs are are low and voluntary. The right to open carry will be the equalizer. Besides I believe that the concealed carry prohibition statute 941.23 will eventually be found unconstitutional. At least two justices on the WSC have already stated such and the membership on the WSC has changed to be less liberal than at the time Cole, Hamdan and Fischer were decided.

    The state right to keep and bear arms amendment makes no specific mention of manner of carry therefore it can be presumed to apply to all manners of carry. In Cole the WSC made a lot of noise about legislative intent. Saying that a number of drafts, memoes and personal comments strongly suggest that the legislative intent was to leave the existing concealed carry prohibition statute stay in place. A review of some of the drafts and memoes show some intention of that but that information is construction information. The only version that is of any value is the final version and because it makes no mention of an exclusion of concealed carry it is my belief the final legislative intent is that the right to keep and bear arms includes all manners of carry. That being the case there can be no mandatory requirement for training, anymore than requiring training to go to church. There may be some training requirements for recirocity but it can't be mandated for intrastate carry. IANL but that is how I see it.
    Capain Nemo thank you !

    D.A Chishom and Chief Flynn see the writing on W.S.C. wall also, and have switched on thier position concerning a concealed carry permit system, They also want to eliminate open carry , They want a highly restictive permit system along with making it a felony to posess a concealed firearm without a permit .
    Last edited by springfield 1911; 09-17-2010 at 07:44 AM. Reason: to add: without a permit

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    3,481
    Quote Originally Posted by springfield 1911 View Post
    Capain Nemo thank you !

    D.A Chishom and Chief Flynn see the writing on W.S.C. wall also, and have switched on thier position concerning a concealed carry permit system, They also want to eliminate open carry , They want a highly restictive permit system along with making it a felony to posess a concealed firearm without a permit .
    Yes for sure this will be the next battle. It won't be long before you will have to have a permit and training to operate a riding lawn mower. Springfield can you post that link to the WSC wall where you are seeing this so we can respond if possible?

    I stand firm on Constitutional Carry. No Permits, No fees. It only creates bigger government and we don't need that at all.

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    3,481
    Quote Originally Posted by phred View Post
    I got this email the other day from a firearms instructor. As someone who has and is currently enrolled in firearms training classes, this kind of profiteering makes me angry. Straight from the horses mouth, Conceal Carry instructors promise that government mandated training will line their pocket books as "artificial" demand brought about by the law will drive the mandatory training class prices sky high.



    There is more to this email, but I think you get the drift of it. Considering anyone who wants firearm training is free to go out and obtain it today of their own free will, (like I am), clearly a mandatory training requirement in a new law is as much about profit for firearms instructors as it is about perpetuating a myth that the mandatory class is going to increase safety.

    Avoid the government bureaucracy along with the profiteering by instructors. Contact your legislators after the fall election and let them know you DO NOT support mandatory training.

    I do not begrudge anyone for trying to make a living by offering such services to clients. What bothers me is if training instructors promote legislation that requires training/certification in order to line their pockets. Beware!
    Hate to be the one who says, "I TOLD YOU SO!"
    But, "I TOLD YOU SO!!!!!!!!"
    Not you in particular Phred.
    Last edited by J.Gleason; 09-17-2010 at 10:13 AM.

  12. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193
    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...ls-gun-hearing! Are there union interests involved here too?

  13. #13
    McX
    Guest
    not required to "earn" the right to carry guns.


    Doug's sub-text says it all; take your permit, and money making classes and stick 'em!

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    North Central Wisconsin, ,
    Posts
    768

    ??

    Quote Originally Posted by Doug Huffman View Post
    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...ls-gun-hearing! Are there union interests involved here too?
    Are you saying, Training Instructors are unionized?

  15. #15
    Guest
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    in your pants
    Posts
    397
    Quote Originally Posted by McX View Post
    not required to "earn" the right to carry guns.


    Doug's sub-text says it all; take your permit, and money making classes and stick 'em!
    +about a billion. roughly.

  16. #16
    McX
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by The Don View Post
    +about a billion. roughly.

    plus or minus 10% ofcourse!

  17. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193
    Quote Originally Posted by phred View Post
    Are you saying, Training Instructors are unionized?
    They're not different in their Collective action.

  18. #18
    McX
    Guest
    doug, you, me, and the rest of the old geezers on here should claim; seniority- training exempt!
    (you can't teach an old dog new tricks)

  19. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193
    That's part of "either we're equal or we're not."

    If we discriminate against youth then we must expect to be discriminated against. If training is discriminatory - and it is, you is or you ain't - then eliminate the training rather than embrace the discrimination, or understand the consequences.

    Oh wow, nice double tap prevention script. Well done.
    Last edited by Doug Huffman; 09-17-2010 at 11:12 AM.

  20. #20
    McX
    Guest
    i'd rather get training, informally, from a fellow carrier, young or old. the best training i have had have been with fellow carriers, formal training for the young might be in order, as they just don't have enough experience yet, but even there, and again, a fellow carrier could train them too. no cost, but no formality, the way it used to be!
    Last edited by McX; 09-17-2010 at 11:54 AM. Reason: spelling

  21. #21
    Founder's Club Member springfield 1911's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Racine, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    484
    Quote Originally Posted by J.Gleason View Post
    Yes for sure this will be the next battle. It won't be long before you will have to have a permit and training to operate a riding lawn mower. Springfield can you post that link to the WSC wall where you are seeing this so we can respond if possible?

    I stand firm on Constitutional Carry. No Permits, No fees. It only creates bigger government and we don't need that at all.
    J gleason will these links do?
    YouTube - 4th Street Forum | Program | #823 If you choose not to watch the whole program you can start around 30 min in. Brad was there and did ask a question.

    http://www.expressmilwaukee.com/arti...r-da-says.html

    http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/64262272.html

  22. #22
    Regular Member pahleh's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Fond du Lac, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    44
    Quote Originally Posted by phred View Post
    I got this email the other day from a firearms instructor. As someone who has and is currently enrolled in firearms training classes, this kind of profiteering makes me angry. Straight from the horses mouth, Conceal Carry instructors promise that government mandated training will line their pocket books as "artificial" demand brought about by the law will drive the mandatory training class prices sky high.
    This was from the fellow that calls people "Sheepdogs", correct?

    I got the same thing and had it in the bit bucket before I read half of it.
    "Those who would gve up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin

  23. #23
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    3,481
    Quote Originally Posted by springfield 1911 View Post
    J gleason will these links do?
    YouTube - 4th Street Forum | Program | #823 If you choose not to watch the whole program you can start around 30 min in. Brad was there and did ask a question.

    http://www.expressmilwaukee.com/arti...r-da-says.html

    http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/64262272.html
    Thanks Springfield

  24. #24
    Founder's Club Member springfield 1911's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Racine, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    484
    Shepherd: What would happen if the state Legislature doesn’t act on these reforms?

    Chisholm: I’m going to make a prediction right now because I don’t know if we have the will and the foresight to do this but I predict that nothing will happen and that Chicago vs. McDonald will hold that the Second Amendment is incorporated into the 14th Amendment [and call into question other state and local gun laws]. Then 20 seconds later the NRA will file a challenge to [Wisconsin’s concealed carry statute] and they will win. And at that point in time we will be left with no CCW and no regulatory scheme at all. That’s what I think will happen.

    Yea right on this prediction, The N.R.A. certified instructor's would not be able to profit that the mandatory training would provide if the N.R.A. challanged Wi. concealed carry ban and won.



    Shepherd: How did that happen?

    Chisholm: The [DA’s] office made the improvident decision to prosecute a gentleman named [Munir] Hamdan back in 1999, before I took over as team captain of the gun unit. Hamdan was a store owner who had a gun underneath his store counter, and when the officer went [into his store] and found the gun, he brought him in to prosecute for CCW.

    That implicated the Wisconsin right to keep and bear arms amendment. In the Supreme Court decision, the court upheld the constitutionality of the CCW statute, but barely so. What [the court] basically said was [that the Legislature] needs to start looking very closely at this law and figure out what [it is] going to do with this in the future. But what we’ve done is nothing. So we’ve been living on borrowed time. And that time is up now.

    Pehaps we should'nt wait for the legislature , We could be missing an opportunity.

  25. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    3,481
    Quote Originally Posted by springfield 1911 View Post
    Shepherd: What would happen if the state Legislature doesn’t act on these reforms?

    Chisholm: I’m going to make a prediction right now because I don’t know if we have the will and the foresight to do this but I predict that nothing will happen and that Chicago vs. McDonald will hold that the Second Amendment is incorporated into the 14th Amendment [and call into question other state and local gun laws]. Then 20 seconds later the NRA will file a challenge to [Wisconsin’s concealed carry statute] and they will win. And at that point in time we will be left with no CCW and no regulatory scheme at all. That’s what I think will happen.

    Yea right on this prediction, The N.R.A. certified instructor's would not be able to profit that the mandatory training would provide if the N.R.A. challanged Wi. concealed carry ban and won.



    Shepherd: How did that happen?

    Chisholm: The [DA’s] office made the improvident decision to prosecute a gentleman named [Munir] Hamdan back in 1999, before I took over as team captain of the gun unit. Hamdan was a store owner who had a gun underneath his store counter, and when the officer went [into his store] and found the gun, he brought him in to prosecute for CCW.

    That implicated the Wisconsin right to keep and bear arms amendment. In the Supreme Court decision, the court upheld the constitutionality of the CCW statute, but barely so. What [the court] basically said was [that the Legislature] needs to start looking very closely at this law and figure out what [it is] going to do with this in the future. But what we’ve done is nothing. So we’ve been living on borrowed time. And that time is up now.

    Pehaps we should'nt wait for the legislature , We could be missing an opportunity.
    +1000

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •